UAW workers paid $75 an hour!!!

[trekguy]

If it is the unions that are bringing down the big three right now, then why did Ford show a 30% drop in sales and Toyota showed a 34% in October? It looks to me like it's the economy that's breaking the auto makers back right now, not the workers.

Yep, sales are down for everyone. Which company is going to make it through the tough times.... the one paying $75 per worker, or the one paying $45 per worker (for a superior product, even)?

I'm not really pro or anti union.... I believe there was a real need for worker organization.... now I believe the unions are mostly extortionists. Yes, I've been a union member.

Bankruptcy wouldn't be the end of the Big 3.... just a new beginning. I would also support a gov't loan of some sort..... but no handouts. They need to get their act together.

 

[Alien Allen]

Yep, sales are down for everyone. Which company is going to make it through the tough times.... the one paying $75 per worker, or the one paying $45 per worker (for a superior product, even)?

I'm not really pro or anti union.... I believe there was a real need for worker organization.... now I believe the unions are mostly extortionists. Yes, I've been a union member.

Bankruptcy wouldn't be the end of the Big 3.... just a new beginning. I would also support a gov't loan of some sort..... but no handouts. They need to get their act together.

Who the fuck is this impostor :eek :24:

 

[Fox Mulder]

Yep, sales are down for everyone. Which company is going to make it through the tough times.... the one paying $75 per worker, or the one paying $45 per worker (for a superior product, even)?

I'm not really pro or anti union.... I believe there was a real need for worker organization.... now I believe the unions are mostly extortionists. Yes, I've been a union member.

Bankruptcy wouldn't be the end of the Big 3.... just a new beginning. I would also support a gov't loan of some sort..... but no handouts. They need to get their act together.

The bailout should be conditioned on throwing out the current union contracts and forcing them to renegotiate with a suspension of federal law that prohibits the auto-makers from permanently replacing them if they strike. That would make those fuckers get real--I mean $45 an hour is a pretty good wage--its not like these people would be starving if they were paid the wage prevailing wages that other non-union automakers are paying.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Who the fuck is this impostor :eek :24:

:thumbup Could you imagine if Poochee or Bassetman made such a post!!!! :24::24::24:

 

[Haus]

haha i make over 20 an hour and if i got paid even 30.00 an hour doing their job i would love it.

 

[SgtSpike]

How old are you? Because its astonishing to me that you understand basic economic principles while there are adults here that have no clue. You won't convince Tim or Minor to consider the economics because that doesn't sqaure with their political ideology--in their world 2+2=5 because their ideology is better served by erroneous math.

I'm 22. But I agree with you - it still amazes me how other adults (and like I said, some people twice my age) don't understand the basic economic consequences of many liberal policies. Seems like they would have learned by the time they are that old.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Yep, sales are down for everyone. Which company is going to make it through the tough times.... the one paying $75 per worker, or the one paying $45 per worker (for a superior product, even)?

I'm not really pro or anti union.... I believe there was a real need for worker organization.... now I believe the unions are mostly extortionists. Yes, I've been a union member.

Bankruptcy wouldn't be the end of the Big 3.... just a new beginning. I would also support a gov't loan of some sort..... but no handouts. They need to get their act together.

So then why did you vote for Obama? Unions are the top political contributors donating massive amounts of money to one party (Democrats--they are solely responsible for the demise of the big three as well as many other companies):

Top All-Time Donors 1989-2008 Summary | OpenSecrets

I think it is absolutely appalling that the government unions are permitted to donate hundreds of millions of dollars to the Democrat party with money that is coming right from out tax dollars. Every American should be fucking outraged by this. But the point is the unions have the Democrats in their pockets. No one ever sees this or realizes it--the liberal media projects corporations as the ones with the Republicans in their pockets when you can clearly see its the fucking unions with the Democrats in their pockets--the corporations tend to give money much more evenly to both parties so there is no real advantage. This is what's destroying the American economy and causing us to lose our competetive edge in the world. The Unions are going to force us right down the fucking shitter because the leaders are too stupid and blind to realize they are killing the golden goose.

 

[Fox Mulder]

haha i make over 20 an hour and if i got paid even 30.00 an hour doing their job i would love it.

Well that's another thing--the amount of corruption in obtaining a union job--there is so much pandering and bullshit that goes on--you've got hundreds of people applying an one person gets the job out of those hundreds because of course everyone wants a job where you can come into work drunk and not get fired--where you get paid for doing nothing (literally) where you earn 2 to 3 times what you are worth on an open market. Hell, these union employees make more than most college graduates and professionals and skilled workers. That another problem--it makes some bright people decide to skip college or trade school and go right to work for the unions out of high school and the last thing we want are bright people being paid to do unskilled work. We should be rewarding people for obtaining useful job skills.

 

[trekguy]

The bailout should be conditioned on throwing out the current union contracts and forcing them to renegotiate with a suspension of federal law that prohibits the auto-makers from permanently replacing them if they strike. That would make those fuckers get real--I mean $45 an hour is a pretty good wage--its not like these people would be starving if they were paid the wage prevailing wages that other non-union automakers are paying.

Would not bankruptcy accomplish the same thing?? Would there be any advantage to the rest of us, and the economy overall, if they could avoid bankruptcy??

 

[SgtSpike]

Well that's another thing--the amount of corruption in obtaining a union job--there is so much pandering and bullshit that goes on--you've got hundreds of people applying an one person gets the job out of those hundreds because of course everyone wants a job where you can come into work drunk and not get fired--where you get paid for doing nothing (literally) where you earn 2 to 3 times what you are worth on an open market. Hell, these union employees make more than most college graduates and professionals and skilled workers. That another problem--it makes some bright people decide to skip college or trade school and go right to work for the unions out of high school and the last thing we want are bright people being paid to do unskilled work. We should be rewarding people for obtaining useful job skills.

You really should run for some public office. You'd never get elected, but at least you'd start opening some people's eyes...

 

[Tim]

The market would never pay $75 an hour for an auto worker--that's the point--there is no market for $75 an hour unskilled workers.

But if you would actually do a little fact checking, the Average hourly wage for a Union auto worker for the big three was at $28 and hour in 2007. The average hourly wage for a toyota line worker was at $24 an hour.

By that reasoning we should raise the MW to $75 an hour because it would all go back into our economy. The problem is we compete in a global market so if the cost of labor is too high, no one buys our products or services. And that's not even considering the inflationary effect of higher wages, which does not yield any real purchasing power.

Again, no one is getting $75/hr and I'm not advocating that anyone should.

The effect on the economy of eliminating union (all unions) not just auto would be tremendous--we would have an influx of literally millions of jobs.

Millions of new jobs? Are you serious? Where do you come up with this shit? I need to google that and see what conservative web site you're visiting.
I thought the American dream was all about getting everything you can. Go out and make money! Well unless you belong to a union...

What difference does that make? Management employees are bargained for on a free market--you don't pay them enough, they move to another job/industry. All companies have the same issue--its a level playing field. With the union workers, they are being paid far more than what the market would pay them.

So you never worked for a company that was management top heavy? Where there are managers who just sit in their office playing solitaire on the computer all day?

Seriously, I am at an utter loss to figure out why you are defending this. Just about everyone except Minor and you can see the gross disparity and unfairness of this and it doesn't take an economic genius to figure out that with the big 3 paying $29 per hour more for union labor that they are not going to be competetive.

I would be saying the same thing as you are right now if UAW workers were indeed getting $75/hr on average. But that isn't even close to the truth. So when you start being honest with your facts, then we can have a real discussion. You like every other conservative I know grabbed onto these false numbers and held them up and started saying "See, it's the unions fault" without even taking the time to look at the real numbers. So I really can't have a constructive conversation with you about the economics of it when you don't even bother getting your numbers right to begin with. (Isn't that one of the first rules of economics? getting your numbers right)

You just don't get it do you? :confused You're argument is irrelevant--totally irrelevant to the issues. Management pay/compensation is controlled by market forces so all companies are in the same boat. The foreign auto plants here in the US have to pay their engineers and accountants and managers the same money that Ford and Chrysler do. That's a constant that doesn't effect the competetiveness of a particular product. The fact that Ford/Chrysler has to pay their union stiffs an extra $30 an hour is going to cause a significant comepetetive disadvantage. If you cant' understand that you need to take a fucking economics class.

Once again, the numbers need to be right for YOUR argument to work.

How old are you? Because its astonishing to me that you understand basic economic principles while there are adults here that have no clue. You won't convince Tim or Minor to consider the economics because that doesn't square with their political ideology--in their world 2+2=5 because their ideology is better served by erroneous math.

I have no real political stand on unions. I've seen the good and the bad with unions. But both sides of the fence are usually wrong when arguing the pros and cons of unions. You guys never seem to get your facts straight. If I see something wrong with the union, I say so. But you can't outlaw unions in this country so you will always have to deal with them. We just need to make sure that any laws concerning unions are fair for BOTH sides. That's my stand.

 

[SgtSpike]

But if you would actually do a little fact checking, the Average hourly wage for a Union auto worker for the big three was at $28 and hour in 2007. The average hourly wage for a toyota line worker was at $24 an hour.



Again, no one is getting $75/hr and I'm not advocating that anyone should.



Millions of new jobs? Are you serious? Where do you come up with this shit? I need to google that and see what conservative web site you're visiting.
I thought the American dream was all about getting everything you can. Go out and make money! Well unless you belong to a union...



So you never worked for a company that was management top heavy? Where there are managers who just sit in their office playing solitaire on the computer all day?



I would be saying the same thing as you are right now if UAW workers were indeed getting $75/hr on average. But that isn't even close to the truth. So when you start being honest with your facts, then we can have a real discussion. You like every other conservative I know grabbed onto these false numbers and held them up and started saying "See, it's the unions fault" without even taking the time to look at the real numbers. So I really can't have a constructive conversation with you about the economics of it when you don't even bother getting your numbers right to begin with. (Isn't that one of the first rules of economics? getting your numbers right)



Once again, the numbers need to be right for YOUR argument to work.



I have no real political stand on unions. I've seen the good and the bad with unions. But both sides of the fence are usually wrong when arguing the pros and cons of unions. You guys never seem to get your facts straight. If I see something wrong with the union, I say so. But you can't outlaw unions in this country so you will always have to deal with them. We just need to make sure that any laws concerning unions are fair for BOTH sides. That's my stand.

Lol, did you just completely ignore Mulder's post here?
http://www.offtopicz.net/37970-uaw-workers-paid-75-hour-2.html#post837054

Not to mention the other sources that have been posted in this very thread that show the average UAW wage being $75...

 

[Fox Mulder]

But if you would actually do a little fact checking, the Average hourly wage for a Union auto worker for the big three was at $28 and hour in 2007. The average hourly wage for a toyota line worker was at $24 an hour.

No--not true. I don't know where you get your information from.

Again, no one is getting $75/hr and I'm not advocating that anyone should.

Yes--they are--that number has been quoted all over--the NY Times, the Mises Institute article I provided, US News & World Report--I don't know where you are getting your information from but you aren't providing anything to support it--I've provided numerous sources all using the same numbers.

Millions of new jobs? Are you serious? Where do you come up with this shit? I need to google that and see what conservative web site you're visiting.
I thought the American dream was all about getting everything you can. Go out and make money! Well unless you belong to a union..

Yes--go out an make money based on your own merit and hard work. Union members are making it by extortion and to the detriment of other workers--they are reducing the wages of other people and costing America jobs.

So you never worked for a company that was management top heavy? Where there are managers who just sit in their office playing solitaire on the computer all day?

No--no company I worked for. And if they are caught, they'd be fired (or should be).

I would be saying the same thing as you are right now if UAW workers were indeed getting $75/hr on average. But that isn't even close to the truth. So when you start being honest with your facts, then we can have a real discussion. You like every other conservative I know grabbed onto these false numbers and held them up and started saying "See, it's the unions fault" without even taking the time to look at the real numbers. So I really can't have a constructive conversation with you about the economics of it when you don't even bother getting your numbers right to begin with. (Isn't that one of the first rules of economics? getting your numbers right)

You can't accept the truth. Post your source that says my sources are wrong. Is the NY times Wrong? Is that what you are saying? These are facts that are posted everywhere on the Internet--everywhere.

I have no real political stand on unions.

:24::24::24:

We just need to make sure that any laws concerning unions are fair for BOTH sides. That's my stand.

That's the fucking problem. Why should union workers be allowed to strike and then get their jobs back?? In what "fair" world can employees tell their employers to go fuck themselves with no repercussions? You are apparently completely missing everything that's been posted about how unfair the bargaining power is--why in the fuck do you think the Big 3 pay $29 an hour more for labor!!!

 

[Fox Mulder]

But if you would actually do a little fact checking, the Average hourly wage for a Union auto worker for the big three was at $28 and hour in 2007. The average hourly wage for a toyota line worker was at $24 an hour.

Wall Street Journal:

For UAW, Aid Likely to Come With Strings - WSJ.com

Business Week

UAW Concedes to GM

NPR:

GM Labor Deal May Change U.S. Auto Industry : NPR

Seriously--do you want more?

The problem is you are not considering benefits, including pentions and medical. That has to be considered in the total per hour cost of labor. Its $29 an hour more for the big 3 than for non-union auto makers. That's just the plain facts.

 

[Tim]

Wall Street Journal:

For UAW, Aid Likely to Come With Strings - WSJ.com

Business Week

UAW Concedes to GM

NPR:

GM Labor Deal May Change U.S. Auto Industry : NPR

Seriously--do you want more?

The problem is you are not considering benefits, including pentions and medical. That has to be considered in the total per hour cost of labor. Its $29 an hour more for the big 3 than for non-union auto makers. That's just the plain facts.

Why would I consider the benefits and pensions? You aren't when you cite the hourly wages at Toyota. So let's compare apples to apples.

Now if you want to consider the benefits and pensions. Then once again you need to do a little creative math to come up with the $75/hour figure. You need to take every dollar that the big three pay out in salary, benefits and pension each year and divide by the number of workers, right? Well here is the problem. To get to the $75/hr figure, you need to account for EVERY active workers hourly rate, benefits and pension PLUS the pensions being paid to every retired worker PLUS any benefits they are receiving then divide by only the active number of workers. So, by using creative math you get to $73/hr of cost per hour worked in the calendar year. That is a far cry from what the average worker is bringing home. By your math, they would be bringing home an average of $156,000/yr when it's actually $58,240 that the average worker brings home.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Why would I consider the benefits and pensions? You aren't when you cite the hourly wages at Toyota. So let's compare apples to apples.

YES--THEY ARE CONSIDERING IT FOR TOYOTA-THEY ARE COMPARING THE TOTAL COST PER HOUR FOR LABOR. Workers at Toyota are not making $40 plus per hour salary--that number they are using to come up with the $29 difference is the total cost.

Now if you want to consider the benefits and pensions. Then once again you need to do a little creative math to come up with the $75/hour figure. You need to take every dollar that the big three pay out in salary, benefits and pension each year and divide by the number of workers, right? Well here is the problem. To get to the $75/hr figure, you need to account for EVERY active workers hourly rate, benefits and pension PLUS the pensions being paid to every retired worker PLUS any benefits they are receiving then divide by only the active number of workers. So, by using creative math you get to $73/hr of cost per hour worked in the calendar year. That is a far cry from what the average worker is bringing home. By your math, they would be bringing home an average of $156,000/yr when it's actually $58,240 that the average worker brings home.

The only reason those workers are getting those pensions is because the UAW demanded it. Do you get a pension? I don't have a pension. Is your employer providing you life long medical care even after retirement? Mine isn't. I have my own 401K that I contributed to. Most workers today (aside from unions) don't have pensions--they have 401K plans and if they are lucky, the employer is making a small contribution (usually a few percentage points). And most workers do not have medical care provided by their employers after they retire.

You just won't face facts that it is a ridiculous benefit package the UAW has for its workers and that adds a huge cost--it is a cost that must be considered precisely the way you described it because to not do so would distort the actual cost of a UAW worker. You need to divide every dollar he/she costs the company both while working and after retirement.

 

[mlb68]

I don't work for the big three but I do have family and friends that do and have for years, with that be said.
The time for unions has past and have not been nneded for the last 20 years or more. The unions have sucked the blood for too long and it is time to burn the union cards in this country.
I work for a top auto maker in the US and have been treated better than any of the union workers I know, my pay is close to the same and my beniftis are better.
The only thing that unions have done for them as far as I can see is take money give little in return except to save someones job who screwed up by hitting the boss, coming in drunk or just not shown up for work.
We all want to work with others like that.
MBL68

 

[Hoffa]

I don't work for the big three but I do have family and friends that do and have for years, with that be said.
The time for unions has past and have not been nneded for the last 20 years or more. The unions have sucked the blood for too long and it is time to burn the union cards in this country.
I work for a top auto maker in the US and have been treated better than any of the union workers I know, my pay is close to the same and my beniftis are better.
The only thing that unions have done for them as far as I can see is take money give little in return except to save someones job who screwed up by hitting the boss, coming in drunk or just not shown up for work.
We all want to work with others like that.
MBL68

From what you say , you are a part of the problem . You enjoy too much pay , and need your benefits cut drastically .
Its people like you , making all that money and benefits --that is ruining the auto industry !.
Hope they cut you back to min wage , or better yet , as Mulder would prefer --less !.
Whatever event that happened 20 years ago , I cant imagine . :confused >f

 

[Alien Allen]

From what you say , you are a part of the problem . You enjoy too much pay , and need your benefits cut drastically .
Its people like you , making all that money and benefits --that is ruining the auto industry !.
Hope they cut you back to min wage , or better yet , as Mulder would prefer --less !.
Whatever event that happened 20 years ago , I cant imagine . :confused >f

aw come on nobody is talking about minimum wage.

but we are talking about are obscene benefits when laid off and when retired.

other than friggin congress nobody gets that kind of benefit package.

 

[Strauss]

Because the largest contributors to political parties (actually pretty much just one party-Democrat) and to political campaigns is unions.

I'll let Mulder post the link to the facts and statistics.

So then why did you vote for Obama? Unions are the top political contributors donating massive amounts of money to one party (Democrats--they are solely responsible for the demise of the big three as well as many other companies):

Top All-Time Donors 1989-2008 Summary | OpenSecrets

Did I call it or what?